Keith Hodges wrote:
> Andreas Raab wrote:
>> The difference appears to be in Time>>now which for some inexplicable
>> reason now includes a milliseconds value. Albeit incorrectly I might
>> add since the msecs clock is not actually synchronized with the
>> seconds clock. Looks like a regression to me.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>   - Andreas
> It is "actually" synchronised.

Oh, I see. You're keeping an offset manually. I was referring to 
primMsecsClock which has no relation (at least on Windows) to the value 
obtained by primTotalSeconds. Do you know if this adjustment will 
survive standby/suspend and power cycling?

Cheers,
   - Andreas